Outcomes-Based Assessment

Assessment and evaluation are two important components of a school psychologist's role. Outcomesbased assessment is a traditional, well-established form of measuring student achievement. It evolved from the testing movement of the early 1900s, the accountability movement of the 1920s, and the evaluation of educational programs of the 1930s. Outcomesbased assessment is defined as the measurement of student achievement in regard to critical, prioritized goals and objectives. While outcomes can be measured in a variety of ways, such as authentic and alternative assessment, outcomes-based assessment is typically associated with statewide and district testing programs in the United States and in entities such as the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and the National Assessment of Vocational Education (NAVE). Outcomes-based assessment also has an international emphasis, which is widespread.

It is important to distinguish between outputs and outcomes. The Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 (GPRA) views outputs as the number of students graduating from a school system, the types of curricula taken, academic and vocational credits earned, and so forth; whereas outcomes focus on what students have learned, what they can do now, and what they can do in the future. The evaluation of federally funded programs is increasingly stressing the need for outcomes-oriented data.

As noted, outcomes-based assessment is prominent in school proficiency tests, with results being reported publicly and distributed widely to varied audiences, including parents. Publicizing results (to describe the performance of districts, schools within districts, and individual students usually against established standards and criteria) is referred to as “high-stakes testing.” Complicating the picture is the fact that standards are partially dependent on the reasoned judgments of individuals, such as teachers and subjectmatter experts.

There are advantages and disadvantages associated with high-stakes testing and the use of results obtained from it (Cizek, 2001). On the positive side, the testing and the subsequent results:

• Provide a benchmark for how well the schools are doing
• Illuminate areas in need of improvement
• Help restructure and improve the curricula
• Are accepted as meaningful by many educators and groups in society

If the testing and subsequent results at the district, school, or individual level are below standard, negative consequences may follow. Schools may be viewed as deficient; teachers may be pressed to teach to the test; and some students may be labeled as nonachievers and may not graduate, or may receive a tagged or differentiated high school diploma indicating [Page 365]their inability to reach the (e.g., district, state) standard. This outcome may be especially relevant for students who are adolescents with special needs.

School psychologists, particularly those working in smaller school systems, would usually be the professionals most knowledgeable about proficiency testing and test results because of their training and experience. By default, school psychologists may see a shift in their role from administering specialized assessment instruments to individuals for diagnostic purposes to that of interpreting proficiency test results, conducting training sessions on the nature of those results, and working with teachers and administrators to develop plans and strategies for enhancing district, school, and individual achievement. In the near future, this shift may expand their general duties in the areas of program evaluation, curriculum refinement, and improved development of instructional strategies; such changes in their role will affect how students in graduate programs of school psychology are trained.

...